Hi Laurent,
On 02/23/2016 03:02 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
Hi Javier,
On Tuesday 23 February 2016 13:27:51 Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
On 02/23/2016 01:16 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
On Tuesday 23 February 2016 13:09:58 Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
The chip internal signal generator was modelled as an input connector
and represented as a media entity but isn't really a connector so the
driver was changed to use the V4L2_CID_TEST_PATTERN control instead.
Remove the signal generator input from the list of connectors in the
tvp5150 DT binding document as well since isn't a connector anymore.
Signed-off-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
Hello,
I think is OK to change this DT binding because is only in the media tree
for now and not in mainline yet and also is expected to change more since
there are still discussions about how input connectors will be supported
by the Media Controller framework in the media subsystem.
I think that's fine, yes
Acked-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks.
I haven't noticed the patch that introduced this early enough I'm afraid,
and I think we still have issues with those bindings.
Yes, I posted those patches and got merged before we had the discussion
about input connectors over IRC so I didn't know what was the correct way
to do it.
The tvp5150 node should *not* contain connector subnodes, the connectors
nodes should use the bindings defined in
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/display/connector/ and be linked to the
tvp5150 node using the OF graph bindings (ports and endpoints).
Agreed.
Do you think you could fix that ?
Yes I will, I'm waiting for the input connectors discussions to settle so I
can post a final version of the DT bindings following what is agreed by all.
Shouldn't we revert the patch that introduced connectors support in the DT
bindings in the meantime then, to avoid known to be broken bindings from
hitting mainline in case we can't fix them in time for v4.6 ?
Yes, that would be a good idea. I've seen recently though a DT binding doc that
was marked as unstable / work in progress and I wonder if that's a new accepted
convention for DT binding docs or is just something that slipped through review.
The commit I'm talking about is f07b4e49d27e ("Documentation: bindings: berlin:
consider our dt bindings as unstable") but I don't see anything documented in
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/ABI.txt.
In any case, I'm fine with either marking the DT binding doc as unstable or to
revert the patch that added the connectors portion to the tvp5150 DT binding.
Best regards,
--
Javier Martinez Canillas
Open Source Group
Samsung Research America
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
